Archives

30, Mincing Lane. E.C.

London, 21 February 1917
Messrs James Burness & Sons
138, Leadenhall Street E. C.

Dear Sirs,
We have considered the question discussed at our yesterday's interview with you.
Messrs Worms & Co if they continue to carry on business as a firm, will certainly require to be registered under the recent Act of Parliament, and, in our opinion, the names of all those who are interested in the business, whether as commanditaires or otherwise, must be registered, and their names must appear upon all business letters etc as required by section 18 of the Act.
We appreciate the objection that Messrs Worms may have to this procedure and have come to the conclusion that the necessity for it might be avoided by forming a Company in whose name the business here might be carried on. This Company would be registered like any other Company, at Somerset House and the names of the Shareholders would appear but there would be no public announcement of them. Persons who wanted to know the names of the Shareholders in the Company would have the privilege of doing so upon payment of a small fee for the purpose. The result would be that, unless people were really interested in the Company, they would not investigate its membership.
If the business were so carried on, it would of course result that the Company would be conducting its business as Agents for Messrs Worms of Paris, and the Act of Parliament would require that the Company should be registered and that the names of Messrs Worms & Co as a firm should also be registered under the Act, but, for this purpose, it would not be necessary to state who were the partners in the firm or give any such particulars, nor would the names of either the members of the Company or the members of the firm appear upon their paper etc. Thus the objection which Messrs Worms take to the appearance on their paper etc. of the names of those who are merely commanditaires in their firm would not arise.
The formation of the Company would be attended with some expense, but not, we think, of a prohibitive character. The legal charges in connection with the formation, printing etc. would not we should think be likely to exceed £100. In addition to these there would be stamp duty at the rate of 5s/- per cent: payable to the Government upon the Capital, but we should assume that the capital could be kept within quite narrow limits as the Paris firm could lend to the English Company all such funds as it might from time to time require.
Messrs Worms would certainly have an advantage from this from another point of view;- that the risk they would incur in carrying on the business here would be limited to the assets of the Company including its uncalled Capital if any there were.
We trust that the above explanation will suffice for your purpose, but, if there be anything upon which you require further information you will, no doubt, let us hear.
Yours faithfully

Coward & Hawksley, Sons & Chance

PS. It might also be practicable to register a Company as Worms & Cie without limitation of liability and without the necessity of using the word "limited" after the Company's name.